"NASA found that 2017 was 1.6 degrees Fahrenheit (.9 degrees Celsius) above the average temperature from 1951 through 1980. 2016 was .99 degrees Celsius higher, and 2015 just .86 degrees Celsius higher, according to the agency."

So in 2015 the worlds temp was about 57.86 degrees Celsius. In 2016 it went up to 57.99 and now we are back to 57.9 plus or minus 0.08 degrees celsius. The last three years are in a dead heat for hottest year EVER!

I fear we are entering a period of deep cold. When the groundhog comes out we will know for sure but I think it may be cold for months to come.

“The annual change from year to year can bounce up and down. There is year to year variability, but the long term trends are very clear,” said Deke Arndt, who heads the global monitoring branch at NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information.

This is getting ridiculous. The WaPo is just reporting the news and explaining what we have explained to you numerous times in the past. Now, you admit that single yearly changes are not meaningful. That's progress.

The problem with leftie dumdums is that they give nobel prizes to dumdums and blowhards and trigglypuff is their patron saint. No discussion, disagreements allowed-agree with whatever we say or off with your heads.

Y'all do know that NASA and NOAA do some manipulating with temperature numbers to get that massive -0.09 degree temperature change from 2016 to 2017? Don't you?

You mean to say that scientists have algorithms for removing known causes of variation to compensate for things like cities creating local heat islands? They do this to make a more accurate estimation of the average global surface temperature, which is not directly measured? What are you going to tell us next? Do the scientists eat cereal for breakfast? God no!

They do this to make a more accurate estimation of the average global surface temperature

No. They lower old temperature readings and raise newer temperature readings and even then they can only squeeze hundredths of a degree of warming. Why don't they provide the unaltered data alongside the manipulated data?

In related news, the stock market has peaked today: The Dow is down 47 points. "If it was really a bull market, it would go up every day" says Onvacation. "It isn't; so that proves beyond doubt that pundits are lying: there is no bull market."

You mean to say that scientists have algorithms for removing known causes of variation to compensate for things like cities creating local heat islands? They do this to make a more accurate estimation of the average global surface temperature, which is not directly measured?

You mean scientists WRITE algorithms to get the desired results, or go back and tweak them until they get what they want in results? Those algorithms (written to support the continuation of their paychecks)?

In related news, the stock market has peaked today: The Dow is down 47 points. "If it was really a bull market, it would go up every day" says Onvacation. "It isn't; so that proves beyond doubt that pundits are lying: there is no bull market."

The stock market closed UP 54 points. So that proves beyond doubt that the pundits are lying, there is no Global Warming.

Y'all do know that NASA and NOAA do some manipulating with temperature numbers to get that massive -0.09 degree temperature change from 2016 to 2017? Don't you?

Bad video.

He's arguing that the % of days with temp above 95 is a good way to determine if the earth is warming. Think carefully, and you will notice the sleight of hand of this trickster. The average temp is what matters - the temp year round, 24 hrs a day, all averaged. He's munging the data by graphing very specific time periods, time periods that vary. This is just measuring momentary peak temps.

It's convincing because it's a reasonable assumption that more hot days = more average hotness, but it's not necessarily true. You could easily have the average daily temp rising while having less days where it gets > 95.

To be clear, I'm not saying the earth is or isn't warming, just that his metric using peak temp & % of days > 95 is BS.

Also, he does a similar trick with the rest of the video. Notice that hes comparing a chart showing "departure from average" vs another chart showing "temp percentiles". One is a relative measurement - comparing the temp of a single month to a decades long average, and the other another relative measurement, but it's a percentile ranking. To me, that sounds like its relative to the rest of the earth temp in that month (eg, would be great to find hottest places of the earth that month). So, they're not even relative to the same thing. So one compares "same location, different time period". The other compares "same time period, DIFFERENT LOCATIONS". Even worse, one is "land only", and the other includes the ocean. Wtf? Why would you compare those 2 data sets? This is so awful.

Good trick though. You see this type of stuff often in the financial industry, product marketing, and in conspiracy theory perpretrators. It's how they can show you amazing performance graphs - they graph something just slightly different, so it goes under your radar, and so you believe it. Few people pay close enough attention to spot these tricks, and many more just aren't even the least bit scientifically minded, so they believe it because "its science", but cant see that it's bad science.

I live on Virginia's coast where we have been warned of sea level rise for years. However, the sea level has actually fallen.Here's the 'scuse:

Hampton Roads is known as a global hot spot for rapid sea level rise, but the recent cold snap seems to have put sea level rise on retreat.Temporarily.Experts at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science in Gloucester Point report that a spate of lower water levels and tides noted around the Chesapeake Bay are likely a matter of the natural winter cycle, planetary alignment and a complex suite of atmospheric forces.One force is no mystery at all.“We’re near the low in the seasonal cycle right now because it’s winter,” said John Boon, a tidal expert and emeritus professor at VIMS, in a release. “And water contracts when it’s colder.”Then, he said, there are the “persistent northerly winds” that act to push water out of the bay. Hampton Roads just endured an unusual episode of such winds from Dec. 30 to Jan. 7, ushering in arctic temperatures.To makes thing worse, a tropical storm with uncommonly intense low pressure helped drive those winds and bring significant snowfall to Virginia and the East Coast. The snow only enhanced the cold temperatures.Climate models indicate that global warming may make such storms more intense and polar air more likely to dip southward in the future. That’s because the melting Arctic ice acts to weaken the polar jet stream, causing it to whiplash up and down. When it dips down into the U.S., it brings arctic air with it.“Cold air masses that used to be held more tightly in the polar region are now able to reach mid-latitudes, like water from a broken dam,” Boon said.Another likely factor for the lower tides, according to professor emeritus Carl “Woody” Hobbs, is barometric pressure.“High barometric pressure depresses water levels just as low pressure increases storm surge,” Hobbs said. “The very clear, very cold weather we just experienced often occurs with high pressure.”

Fossil fuels has peaked. Fossil energy is steadily being replaced by clean energy. The chances of fossil fuel surviving is ......Zip Zero Zilch.

https://gofossilfree.org/the-truth-the-fossil-fuel-industry-doesnt-want-you-to-know/ The future is not looking good for the fossil fuel industry. The rise of renewable energy and climate policy agreements have created a tipping point marking the end of the dominance of hydrocarbons. Despite the claims that our energy mix can’t function without it, everyday there is news of the closing of coal mines, oil companies moving out of projects, and increased uptake of renewable energy. Dirty energy is no longer profitable for profit nor planet.

Few people pay close enough attention to spot these tricks, and many more just aren't even the least bit scientifically minded, so they believe it because "its science", but cant see that it's bad science.

So true.Funny how the alarmist have changed their tune from imminent exponential temperature and sea level rise to 2 degrees and a foot of sea level by the end of the century (we'll all be too dead to confirm) will be catastrophic.

No. They lower old temperature readings and raise newer temperature readings and even then they can only squeeze hundredths of a degree of warming. Why don't they provide the unaltered data alongside the manipulated data?

There have been a number of posts where people ask for the raw data and claim that scientists are faking the temperature increase. A good summary of the issue is here: https://www.skepticalscience.com/surface-temperature-measurements-advanced.htmThe important things to note:The raw temperature data are freely available for download and the adjusted data are available as well.The code that NASA and CRU use are available for public download and inspection. People have downloaded these codes and reproduced the published temperature profiles.Many independent investigators have independently written their own code to calculate average surface temps, and have come up with similar temperature increases over time. This is true for both the raw temperature data and the adjusted data.The temp increase is observed with data around airports or with data excluding airports. They've found it with or without mountaintop data. They've found it with and without ocean data.This should put to rest the idea that the world is actually cooling rather than warming.

The temp increase is observed with data around airports or with data excluding airports. They've found it with or without mountaintop data. They've found it with and without ocean data.This should put to rest the idea that the world is actually cooling rather than warming.

One degree over a century is not exponential warming. Why was the narrative changed from exponential temp and sea rise to "2 degrees by the end of the century WILL be catastrophic". Can you explain why we went to climate change from global warming when the temp did not rise as predicted?Thanks for playing.

The Housing Trap
You're being set up to spend your life paying off a debt you don't need to take on, for a house that costs far more than it should. The
conspirators are all around you, smiling to lure you in, carefully choosing their words and watching your reactions as they push your buttons,
anxiously waiting for the moment when you sign the papers that will trap you and guarantee their payoff. Don't be just another victim of the
housing market. Use this book to defend your freedom and defeat their schemes. You can win the game, but first you have to learn how to play
it.115 pages, $12.50